Press Tour: ‘The Following’ panel kisses, but doesn’t tell

Kevin Williamson knows more than a little about pop culture analysis. His “Scream” movies were loving deconstructions of the tropes of slasher movies, and other Williamson works like “Dawson’s Creek” and the first “I Know What You Did Last Summer” movie featured plenty of meta commentary about the nature of the stories being told.

His new FOX serial killer drama “The Following,” though, is played entirely straight. And when Williamson joined star Kevin Bacon and the rest of the show’s cast at press tour, he was only a bit reflective of where the show fits into the long tradition of serial killers in pop culture, and not at all about what the show has to say about the many violent acts its characters commit (other than that they’re horrific), and what place violent entertainment has in a post-Columbine, post-Aurora, post-Newtown world.

Either Williamson hasn’t considered the subjects very much, or he simply wasn’t adequately briefed by FOX PR (who traditionally provide lists of expected questions to all press tour panelists). Whatever the reason, he didn’t have an answer ready for the many questions about the show’s violent content – it stars Bacon as an ex-FBI agent brought out of retirement to chase the disciples of a charismatic serial killer (James Purefoy) he caught years earlier – and what exactly it means.

“With regards to the violence…. I don’t know,” he said uncomfortably after a question on whether a show this graphic should be airing at 9 p.m. on a broadcast network. He acknowledged, “There’s some moments that are squeamish, it’s not for the faint of heart… But it’s not the sum of the show.”

Asked about the Newtown shootings, he said he’s still haunted by thoughts of that incident, and the one in Aurora, but tried to distance his show from them.

“It reaches a moment where that just gets too real,” he said. “I think that’s one of the reasons it so affects me: it’s so real, and I’m writing fiction.”

He did say that the show was inspired in part on some research he did into Gainesville serial killer Danny Rolling while he was writing “Scream,” and that “what happened at Columbine, in a lot of ways, sort of inspired some of this, in a weird way,” in the way that the show deals with the “emptiness” in the hearts of some people driven to kill, but quickly stopped himself to remind us, “It’s meant to be a work of fiction.”

He didn’t have an answer to a question about whether the show was making any kind of point about the specific kinds of baroque violence are used on the show. And when asked about how the writing staff thinks up these particular acts, he said, “We don’t just sit around and think of ways to kill people. I’m sitting around and thinking of drama.”

In terms of the enduring popularity of fictional serial killers, Williamson did acknowledge, “Clearly, ‘Silence of the Lambs’ inspired me. I was the guy who saw the movie, who read the book in a day, then read it the next day. I was completely inspired by that book. It was a huge inspiration, the movie was amazing, I thought it was a very well crafted piece of work. When I was growing up, I always watched the scary stuff.” He said that what might differentiate “The Following” from all the other children of Hannibal Lecter is that “This is sort of an escalation. It’s a big concept,” because the Purefoy character is influencing an entire generation of killers.

I’ll be writing more about “The Following” before it debuts on January 21 – in the Monday at 9 p.m. timeslot that used to belong to “24,” which Williamson cited as his favorite TV show ever – but I will say that my biggest concern about it isn’t that it’s so graphic, but that it seems to be violence for its own sake, rather than having anything to say about what it means, whether it’s as a “Scream”-esque analysis of serial killer fiction or as a discussion of the emotional causes and toll of violence in general. (Natalie Zea, who plays Purefoy’s ex-wife, even said of the acting challenges of the show, “I’ve been really fortunate to not have a lot of excess baggage to have to place under the surface, because everything that’s going on is so crazy and awful and heartbreaking and horrific.”)

And while sometimes press tour panels do a good job of suggesting there’s more thought to the work than what’s apparent on screen in the early episodes, this was one that largely confirmed my fears.

On the plus side, Bacon did kiss Purefoy (on the cheek) after a critic noted the chemistry between the two of them. So there was entertainment, if not insight.

Join The Discussion: Log In With

I’ll still give the show a try, but now I’m more worried about it ultimately being yet another empty exercise that fetishizes violence. Bleah. You’d think Williamson, of all people, would get this right!

By: joel

01.08.2013 @ 11:33 PM

“…but I will say that my biggest concern about it isn’t that it’s so graphic, but that it seems to be violence for its own sake, rather than having anything to say about what it means..”

It’s a bit surprising how close this comment from Alan matches what I got reading the quotes from Williamson in this interview. He sounds as though he hasn’t considered anything beyond what is scary and what is gory, which is disturbing, because Fox is promoting the hell out of this show. I hope it ends up being more than a gore fest week to week.

By: J

01.08.2013 @ 8:24 PM

I don’t know whether it’s more disappointing that there’s yet another piece of product about serial killers on the market — ‘Criminal Minds’ continues to be one of the most abhorrent things out there, CBS should continue to be ashamed of itself (all the way to the bank) — or disappointing that, because Williamson is involved, I’ll probably give this one a chance.

Williamson should be meta-minded enough to know that if you’re dealing with violence, you are going to have to consider that violence. Or maybe ‘Scream’ was only brilliant because he managed to articulate Wes Craven’s much deeper concerns.

My tolerance for violence is at its limit with Sons of Anarchy, Game of Thrones, and Boardwalk Empire. This sounds like another pointless and desensitizing gore-fest on the order of American Horror Story. Sad that there’s such an appetite for these soul-sucking shows.

By: Blake

01.09.2013 @ 12:16 AM

It’s still all about the story.

The worst thing TV showrunners could do would be try to address violence in some lame “Superfriends” kind of way. Worst in terms of making quality drama, that is.

Remember when “24” had to hold back its debut because of 9/11? It turned out that a drama with a terrorism theme was actually prescient and relevant. The flaw in that show wasn’t the depiction of terrorism, which critics at the time wrung their hands about — it was that eventually everybody at CTU was a mole, or dead, or a dead mole. Writing. Not terrorism. And definitely not violence.

By: sepinwall

01.09.2013 @ 12:46 AM

24 didn’t have to hold back its premiere because of 9/11. It was always scheduled to debut in November because of FOX’s baseball playoff commitments. The extra time just gave the producers an opportunity to edit the scene where Mandy blows up the plane so the image would be less evocative of 9/11.

By: dan

01.09.2013 @ 12:52 AM

You can read all about it in “The Revolution Was Televised,” by Alan Sepinwall…

-Daniel

By: Jonas.Left

01.10.2013 @ 9:46 PM

24 did hold back in its treatment of terroorism. Innstead of a villain who hated a America they had Dennis Hopper as a warlord with a grudge against Jack Bauer and Senator Palmer. They also cut a more graphic shot of the plane bombing in ths pilot. (That bombing actually makes no sense given what the bad guys wanted to accomplish. ) These changes are why season one isn’ cohesive.

By: Maureen

01.09.2013 @ 1:59 AM

I was going to watch this, because I adore James Purefoy-but Alan’s comment about violence for it’s own sake has given me pause. I do watch violent shows, but only if it is intregal to the story.

I don’t feel like a show like this might “glorify” violence, but I do feel it might be a lazy plot point. Granted I haven’t seen it yet, but whereas before I was excited to see Purefoy in a series again, now I don’t have a good feeling about this show.

By: Banff

01.09.2013 @ 4:28 AM

I think that internal struggles with what Dezbot aptly describes as the fetishizing of violence trouble a lot of us. I sometimes find myself wondering what it says about all of us, including me, that an enormous percentage of the most popular entertainments present people who are good at inflicting violence and death as our greatest heroes, not just soldiers or cops, but even the ever-popular serial killers and assassins, sometimes even presenting them as protagonists, and with an unsubtle message that the solution to problems is to kill people.

Another example is the de riguer scene where someone asks a soldier, or a cop, or even a hit man “Have you ever killed anyone?” in a breathless, reverent tone, visibly wanting and needing the answer to be ‘Yes’. Killer porn. And so many films where the movie trailer focuses, for instant appeal and approval, on the hero blazing away with, guns, and so much the better if they seem comfortable to the point of indifference about it; witness the new Stallone movie where a character says, in outrage, “You can’t just KILL someone like that!” And Stallone’s character merely shrugs and says dismissively “I just did”- as an obvious audience applause line.

I’m never able to get all high-and-mighty in these musings, because I recognize that I’m as avid a follower of many of these shows and movies as the next person.

So what does it say about us? I suppose one philosophical view might be that it’s in our DNA, from our animal origins as a species that evolved from being vulnerable to frighteningly powerful predators to one that developed weapons that made us the ultimate frighteningly powerful predator.

Still, I struggle with all of it, and I can’t seem to ever resolve it. And as Alan noted real, tragic events such as Columbine, Aurora, and Newtown underscore with devastating impact that killing in the real world isn’t entertaining at all.

We know that most of us can find entertainment in these media portrayals without losing that line between entertainment/fantasy and reality. Some of it may even have a healthy effect in some kind of psychological, vicarious way that I’m not smart enough to articulate.

I’m not sure that I’m stating my troubled feelings about this as clearly as I wanted to, but it will have to do for now.

By: ireneinidaho

01.10.2013 @ 3:51 AM

Thank you, BANFF, for articulating some of my feelings. I often feel wrong about adding to the ratings of violent shows, and avoid those that seem only to see how far they can go in shocking viewers. Of the shows I watch, SoA is most troubling to me now. It feels like KS is constantly looking to up the gross violence, but I still want to know what happens to the main characters. If it gets any bloodier, I may just read the weekly reviews to see how it all turns out. I already have my hands over my eyes for the bloody scenes. To me, there is nothing enjoyable about seeing people being tortured in new “creative” ways. Boardwalk Empire has also become a show I’m losing interest in because of the violence.

Yes, I know these shows center on criminals, and violence will occur, but I don’t relish endless graphic depictions. I so hope Vince Gilligan doesn’t feel the need to end BB by outdoing himself in violence.

By: Erika Herzog

01.09.2013 @ 3:13 PM

This is very disappointing. I know that pilot season and the development of TV shows this big takes time — and definitely pre-dates Newtown and everything — but at a certain point isn’t it time to have different kinds of stories.

Even if this is the most masterful piece of writing and acting ever made, I have zero interest in watching something violent and ugly like this. The reality of the world has so much of this awful stuff. I don’t need my entertainment to be front-loaded with this too.

I just think the whole thing is a mistake of collosal proportion. What is the point of a show like this today? What is the appeal.

And really how out of touch are the people making this junk that they think audiences want this kind of experience. I am just sick of it.

By: David

01.09.2013 @ 6:31 PM

Speak for yourself. I enjoy this kind of experience and plenty other people do as well. Personally what I DON’T need is a bunch of self-righteous TV critics asking “what does it all meeeeeeean?!?!” when they see violence on TV, as if that’s some novel idea in 2013. Haven’t we been through enough to know that evil has always existed in the world and will always exist, and sometimes there isn’t a suitable explanation for it? If you don’t want to watch a show that shines a light on that, nobody is forcing you. In turn, the critics need to stop forcing the creators to frame their work in ways they don’t intend.

By: Erika Herzog

01.09.2013 @ 10:09 PM

David, I *was* speaking for myself.

And I think now is the time to have these conversations. For people like Reilly to not acknowledge this needs to be part of the discussion of shows like this is ridiculous, short-sighted, and more importantly, out of touch with how disturbed a lot of people are by the violence in our world today.

i’m grateful Landgraf got it. sort of cemented a long-term crush i’ve had of his ability to create a network with interesting creative partnerships and the possibility that not everyone in the industry is clueless.

By: David

01.10.2013 @ 1:48 PM

You said: “And really how out of touch are the people making this junk that they think audiences want this kind of experience.”

Obviously some audiences do want it, which is why I said “speak for yourself.”

And, again, I’m not sure I understand what “conversation” needs to be had, exactly. I asked Alan below, and apparently he isn’t going to respond, but I’m curious what violent shows you watch that you DON’T object to because you see them as high-quality entertaining television. I don’t see anyone up in arms over the extreme violence in shows like Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire, Game of Thrones, Dexter, The Walking Dead, etc.

Again, if you don’t want to watch, turn it off. But I don’t see the need for a “conversation.”

By: Erika Herzog

01.10.2013 @ 6:01 PM

David, we obviously fundamentally disagree.

I don’t look to entertainment to provide me with images and stories of violence. I don’t watch the shows you list, actually. Those are not “my” shows, nor are they the reason I enjoy TV.

If you don’t understand that the TCAs — a time where new shows are being presented and conversations are ideally had about the context within which shows are made — is the exact time to talk about this issue, well that’s something that makes sense to me.

And from both Alan and Daniel’s responses (and other TCA members), to them too.

Given what just happened in Newtown and Aurora — a place where I have family actually — this real life counterpart to what we see on TV as far as violence goes — is why someone like Langraf comes to the table with statistics, having a really amazing conversation. Because in my opinion it is time.

You disagree. Lets leave it at that maybe?

By: David

01.09.2013 @ 6:51 PM

Alan, can you tell me why “The Following” is being singled out among other violent shows? Are the same questions being asked of the writers on Breaking Bad, Boardwalk Empire, Game of Thrones, Dexter, etc?

By: Jonas.Left

01.10.2013 @ 10:13 PM

Even works of Shakespeare have been dismissed as pointless violence. Why violence as a subject is always a sked to justify itself is interesting. Why not romance? What’s the point of stories of love? What’s the point of telling stories of friendship or ambition or revenge or idealism? Because they are compelling aspects of human existence. They are some of the interesting things we do and are. My only pdoblem with violence in entertainment is if the work has no moral point of view or worse a skewed moral point of view. In The Dark Knight the Joker has charisma and a seductive philosophy of anarchy as freedom. Its by showiing his violence that the film undercuts the more attractive aspects of his ideas. Because no matter how good an idea sounds if innocent people have to hurt innocent people in its cause we know that idea is bankrupt.

It should also be said that a show should be allowed to discover its themes. I think many novelists and writers would admit that they didn’t know what their stories were really about until they were well int of the process of setting them down. A pilot is essentially a first chapter in novel written over the course of years. I think as long as the storytelling is solid and the pov is not in favor of its villain they should get to find their point.